Holmes-Mateo

United States v. Holmes-Mateo

Good Law
89 F. App'x 654
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 15, 2004No. 03-10167; D.C. No. CR-02-01264-SMMCalifornia263 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Defendant Raul Edgardo Holmes-Mateo appeals his sentence for illegal re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . The district court granted a three-level downward departure for cultural assimilation and applied a three-level downward adjustment for acceptance of responsibility but declined to depart downward for savings to the government. It is the last of those rulings that Defendant *655 seeks to challenge here. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

The district court recognized that, despite the fact that Defendant had declined to enter into a “fast-track” plea agreement with the government, the court retained the discretion whether to grant Defendant a downward departure for savings to the government. See United States v. Rodriguez-Lopez, 198 F.3d 773, 775-76 (9th Cir. 1999). In its written submission to the court before sentencing, the government agreed with Defendant that the court had such discretion, but urged the court for various reasons to “exercise its discretion not to depart.” Although the court’s oral remarks did not acknowledge in so many words that the court knew of its discretion to depart, an explicit recitation is not…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.